Author: ERIK MAGRAKEN

$50,000 Non-Pecuniary Assessment for Chronic Jaw Injury

Written by ERIK MAGRAKEN on June 28, 2019. Posted in Uncategorized.

Reasons for judgement were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, assessing damages for a chronic jaw injury sustained in a collision.

In today’s case (Zamora v. Lapointe) the Plaintiff was injured in a 2014 rear end collision. Liability was admitted by the Defendant. The crash resulted in various soft tissue injuries along with a temporomandibular joint injury. His back, neck and jaw symptoms continued to the time of trial and were not expected to fully recover. In assessing non-pecuniary damages at $50,000 Madam Justice Duncan provided the following reasons:

$75,000 Non-Pecuniary Assessment for Chronic Soft Tissue Injuries With Guarded Prognosis

Written by ERIK MAGRAKEN on June 28, 2019. Posted in ICBC Soft Tissue Injury Cases.

Reasons for judgement were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, assessing damages for a cyclist injured in a vehicle collision.

In today’s case (Wang v. Johal) the Plaintiff was injured in a 2014 vehicle collision. The Defendant struck the left side of her body and knocking her from her bicycle onto the pavement. Fault was admitted. The crash resulted in chronic soft tissue injuries to her leg and low back. There was some room for further improvement but the prognosis was generally guarded.

In assessing non-pecuniary damages at $75,000 Mr. Justice Mayer provided the following reasons:

Law and Equity Act Does Not Require Separate Crash Claims to be Heard Together

Written by ERIK MAGRAKEN on June 27, 2019. Posted in BCSC Civil Rule 22.

Reasons for judgement were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, confirming that it is discretionary, not mandatory, for a court to order injury claims arising from separate crashes to be heard together.

In today’s case (Hendricks v. Xie) the Plaintiff suffered profound injuries in a collision. Her claim was scheduled for trial. Prior to trial she was involved in a subsequent albeit less severe collision.

The Defendant brought an application saying both claims must be heard at the same time.

ICBC Jury Trial Request Denied Where In House Counsel Failed to File Jury Notice in Time

Written by ERIK MAGRAKEN on June 25, 2019. Posted in BCSC Civil Rule 12, BCSC Civil Rule 22, Jury Trials.

Reasons for judgment were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, dismissing an ICBC application to lengthen the applicable time frame to file a jury notice.

In today’s case (Chapman-Fluker v. Gustavson) the Plaintiff was injured in a collision and sued for damages. The Defendants, insured by ICBC and initially represented by in house counsel, failed to file a jury notice in the applicable time frame.

Months before trial the Defendants applied to allow them to file their jury notice beyond the specified time limits.

Charter Damage Lawsuit Requires Constitutional Question Notice

Written by ERIK MAGRAKEN on June 24, 2019. Posted in Damages for Charter Breaches.

Reasons for judgement were published today by the BC Supreme Court, New Westminster Registry, finding that notice under the Constitutional Questions Act is required for parties seeking Charter damages as part of a personal injury lawsuit.

In today’s case (Fong v. British Columbia) the Plaintiff was injured as a result of a “hard takedown” arrest carried out by officers of the RCMP.

$110,000 Non-Pecuniary Assessment for L2 Fracture With Persistent Symptoms

Written by ERIK MAGRAKEN on June 18, 2019. Posted in Uncategorized.

Reasons for judgement were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Kamloops Registry, assessing damages for chronic injuries suffered in a vehicle collision.

In today’s case (Kennedy v. Cumming) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2015 collision. His was struck by the Defendant’s vehicle while operating his motorcycle. The crash resulted in a fracture to the Plaintiff’s low spine and the onset of symptoms in pre-existing but asymptomatic degeneration. The symptoms persisted to the time of trial and were partly disabling. In assessing non-pecuniary damages at $110,000 Madam Justice Burke provided the following reasons:

$100,000 Non-Pecuniary Assessment for Central Neuropathic Pain With Poor Prognosis

Written by ERIK MAGRAKEN on June 17, 2019. Posted in ICBC Chronic Pain Cases.

Reasons for judgment were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Nanaimo Registry, assessing damages for central neuropathic pain caused by a vehicle collision.

In today’s case (Laliberte v. Jarma) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2015 vehicle collision. She was a passenger in a vehicle driven by the Defendant that lost control “went through a fence and over a bump and landed in a field”. Liability was admitted.

Defence Doctor Opinion Rejected Where Plaintiff Not Examined and Diagnosis “Inferred”

Written by ERIK MAGRAKEN on June 14, 2019. Posted in Uncategorized.

Reasons for judgement were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, assessing damages for collision related injuries and rejecting defence expert medical evidence.

In today’s case (Mladjo v. Etheridge) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2016 collision. Fault was admitted by the Defendant. The crash cause chronic soft tissue injuries and damages were assessed on this basis.

$65,000 Non-Pecuniary Assessment for Likely “Indefinite” Neck and Back Injury

Written by ERIK MAGRAKEN on June 12, 2019. Posted in ICBC Back Injury (soft tissue) Cases, ICBC Soft Tissue Injury Cases, ICBC Whiplash Cases.

Reasons for judgement were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Nanaimo Registry, assessing damages for long lasting soft tissue injuries.

In today’s case (Poulin v. Armstrong) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2013 collision. She was a passenger at the time and was 14 years of age. The Defendant admitted fault. The crash caused soft tissue injuries to her neck and upper back which became chronic and were expected to linger indefinitely.

In assessing non-pecuniary damages at $65,000

ICBC Expert Witness Rejected Due to “Selective View of the Facts”

Written by ERIK MAGRAKEN on June 10, 2019. Posted in ICBC Psychological Injury Cases, Uncategorized.

Reasons for judgement were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, assessing damages for a Plaintiff’s injuries and rejecting expert evidence retained by ICBC.

In today’s case (Wong v. Draaistra) the Plaintiff was injured in two separate collisions. Fault was admitted by the Defendants for the crashes. In addition to physical injuries the Plaintiff developed “psychiatric or emotional problems that have likely increased and prolonged her physical pain, and have caused her life to shrink to near-isolation in an unmaintained home behind almost permanently closed blinds“.